Human rights issue pops up in presidential campaign

Human rights issue pops up in presidential campaign

Wimar Witoelar
InterMatrix Communications
Jakarta
wimar@perspektif.net

Suddenly things are starting to make sense, and it does not
look good. What had so far been a lackluster campaign for
legislative seats, devoid of issues and lacking any semblance of
political platforms, has now become a presidential race with very
large issues at stake: human rights and our nation's attempt
to democratize.

The victory of Wiranto in the Golkar Party's convention last
week brought the political landscape suddenly into bright focus.
We now have two strong candidates -- Wiranto and Susilo Bambang
Yudhoyono -- who are both retired generals and were both high-
ranking officers in the Soeharto military structure before they
pursued different career paths in succeeding governments. Stacked
up against the other candidates, the choice is between a
military-driven and civilian-driven government.

But there are more basic issues at stake. Wiranto is a person
who is not clear of prosecution for alleged human rights
violations. His Golkar victory is not a measure of public
forgiveness of a controversial figure, but an indication of how
much Golkar is still a world unto its own.

Like the Titanic, the party goes on while dangerous icebergs
lurk outside. The Golkar convention may have been one big public
spectacle, but once candidate Wiranto steps outside the public
will not be as friendly. And should he for any reason become head
of state, he (and we, the nation) will find the world full of
unfriendly stares.

The human rights issue is present in yet another form in this
historic presidential election. The General Elections Commission
(KPU) has formed a joint committee with the Indonesian Doctors
Association (IDI) to perform psychiatric and physical
examinations of all presidential candidates.

While this may seem routine when performed on new recruits
for a corporate position, it is unheard of in a democratic
election. Not in France where democracy started, not in the
United States which presents itself as the beacon of democracy,
not in India which is the world's largest democracy has there
ever been a regulation as contradictory to human rights and civil
liberties as the selection of candidates based on medical
standards.

Not only does it violate the human rights of presidential
candidates, it also denies voters the right to elect the
candidate of their choice.

There are reasons for preferring political officials with
perfect health, but that preference can easily be exercised in
the election. That is precisely what elections are about.
Democracy gives people the right to look at each candidate and do
their own trade-off analysis. Candidate A is morally sound but
medically disadvantaged, candidate B is a perfect specimen in
physical terms but holds concepts that are against the public
good, so make your choice. We cannot delegate the human right of
choosing and being chosen to a medical committee.

The irony is that human rights, which have to be defended in
Indonesia, might not necessarily be defended by those candidates
who pass the medical test. In fact, the only person who has a
long and impressive record on human rights might have trouble
passing the physical exam.

Along with the human rights issue, an important criterion
makes it easier to choose between the candidates. Which candidate
is for reform, and which of the presidential contenders only go
through the motions. Remember that we are having these elections
as a result of the popular demand for reform which toppled one of
the world's strongest regimes in 1998. The Soeharto machine was
interrupted to set the stage for democratic reforms. Now six
years later, which candidates are really committed to reform?

Susilo, who is enjoying the sympathy vote, picked as his
running mate Yusuf Kalla, who immediately announced: "I am still
Golkar." So we have Wiranto who is the official Golkar candidate
and Susilo who chose a Golkar person as his running mate, a
person with no clear position on reform, at least not on
public record.

Had Susilo chosen to form a coalition with a reformist group,
that would have given the right signal because Susilo himself is
not a person with a strong political character. Now with a Golkar
official as running mate, he is not very far from Wiranto as a
candidate coming from a Golkar-style political culture.

It is as if 1998 never happened and Soeharto decided to hand
over control to a younger set of people, Wiranto and Susilo.
Discounting the interruption of the reform years, it is as if
Soeharto has managed a smooth transition. With this scenario, New
Order politics will return and it will be as if students never
died on the streets, as if Munir and Hendardi and Ester and all
the human rights activists never existed.

The Megawati-Hamzah Haz ticket would make sense if their
government, which is currently in power, had anything to be proud
of. But it does not. What about the other tickets?

Amien Rais-Agum Gumelar? No real chance. There is, however, a
candidate with a real chance, and that is Abdurrahman "Gus Dur"
Wahid, the official candidate of the National Awakening Party
(PKB). Despite a tumultuous past, his party still remains number
three and his followers are highly visible in areas such as East
Java. With the fragmented voter population distributed among the
candidates, Gus Dur has one of the most solid blocks of voters.

There is only one problem, the KPU action to bar Gus Dur from
the elections. If that happens, not only will we have to bow our
heads in shame for the political crime committed by the KPU, but
we will actually clear the way for two former Army generals to
compete to become the successor to Soeharto. Then the Prague
Spring, our flirtation with democracy, could become history.

The writer was the spokesman for then president Abdurrahman
Wahid's administration in 2000 and 2001.